So, Apple can ask the 8 ball if it should approve the 8 ball itself. If it says "no", then apple should approve it, and if it says "yes" then they shouldn't.
I kind of agree with Microsoft's solution, but applied to companies that supply OSes that connect to the internet, not individual users. Key is to make sure the licensing cost is borne by the developer as a progressive tax on sales, and requirements are sufficiently onerous (e.g. your OS must be formally validated to prove it cannot ever allow a computer to send spam meaning it has to be reimplemented from the ground up in a formal language) to cause general panic and Microsoft spreading a lot of money and free software around to help the whole idea go away.
The quantum effects that occur within your cells is negligible.
Actually, you'd be surprised. Quantum biophysics is a hot area. One of the interesting results explains why it is that ribosomes can churn out proteins at a constant rate, which one wouldn't normally expect given a random distribution of bound amino acids in the cell.
Quantum effects may occur on much larger scales than we suppose.
Sushi, and other words, are defined by how people use them. And in the US that means rice and raw fish wrapped in seaweed for 99% of the population. Then english language, unlike C, does not have an ansi standard. It's all fluid.
Using words means rice and raw fish wrapped in seaweed?
And after that English lost it's ANSI standard, but C didn't?
If your sushi is fluid, I suggest Immodium. Meanwhile, best learn grammar you insensitive clod!
What if the objectionable thing B was using slave labor for a product you do not use or buy? Does it suddenly become okay to continue the business relationship?
And yet I maintain my citizenship, despite what the government or the rascals in Congress does.
Don't do that. You are rooting for someone to win not based on the merits of their arguments, but because you like them and think the other side are jerks. That's very dangerous.
I thought we were talking about Apple, not American Politics.
Back in the 70s I helped debug a program called "Wumpus Advisor" in the MIT AI lab that did just that - it inferred what rules of Wumpus you demonstrated you understood, then attempted to give you hints on those you hadn't demonstrated yet (e.g., when you picked to explore a cave that was not the least dangerous on the frontier).
Yeah, yeah. Limit all the greed except mine. I'll take the greed sins of the world unto myself. Send all your possessions to me. Hurry, while you can still atone!
I think you vastly overestimate the number of good/great programmers in the world. Think dozens, not tens of thousands of them, total.
It's certainly possible that BASIC can be your first language and you get over it. FORTRAN was my first language and I got over that. But unless you happen to be lucky enough to start with a great language (e.g. LISP) , you will have to unlearn everything else first. Learning bad languages just means it takes longer for you to learn good programming paradigms.
While I'm sure most programmers are also users, there are far, far more users who are not programmers. My impression of most OSS tools it that it is written by programmers for programmers, not for users.
This is like arguing Rockefeller didn't have an oil monopoly because you were free to run a wood-burning steam engine, or drill for oil in your own back yard. The monopoly issue relates to control of the market, not to a null of alternatives.
Actually, yes, you do. Compared to other European languages, English has extremely low tolerance for polysyllabic words. It considers two syllables a long word, and revels in monosyllabic grunts.
The simplest patent reform, and applicable to all civil suits, would simply be "loser pays." If these bozos had to pay for Apple's defense, Apple would be more likely to defend than settle, and these guys would have to put up a substantial bond to go forward, discouraging frivolity.
In addition, disbarring lawyers for the real imbicilities could only make the world the better place.
The problem with Max Romantschuk's OP was that he took on a highly naive view of the free market: that because people will pay quite a bit of money for a product therefore the product possesses an amount of value that justifies the price. But the "Mac aura", as I've called it, deflates this view. The Mac aura is nothing other than the illusionary value that the Mac is supposed to possess over and beyond it's real subjective value, and this aura is what props up the price beyond what it's real price would be.
OK, but you can say the same thing about housing, Obama, and religion.
Markets are influenced by emotion. Humans are emotional creatures. Even business value includes intangibles such as "goodwill". If value is subjective as you admit, how do you propose to analyze any "illusory value" above that - it's not illusory to the buyer. You can say that the objective value (within some preference function or system) is less than the price, and you don't have to buy it. But that trades happen at a given price implies some individuals maintain the belief that the value to them at that time meets or exceeds the price. Non-centralized markets means that you can't objectify away environment and intention. You also can't really measure them easily.
Put another way: brands have value too.
Slashdot Mirror
So, Apple can ask the 8 ball if it should approve the 8 ball itself. If it says "no", then apple should approve it, and if it says "yes" then they shouldn't.
Even staunch libertarians don't condone fraud.
I kind of agree with Microsoft's solution, but applied to companies that supply OSes that connect to the internet, not individual users. Key is to make sure the licensing cost is borne by the developer as a progressive tax on sales, and requirements are sufficiently onerous (e.g. your OS must be formally validated to prove it cannot ever allow a computer to send spam meaning it has to be reimplemented from the ground up in a formal language) to cause general panic and Microsoft spreading a lot of money and free software around to help the whole idea go away.
Actually, you'd be surprised. Quantum biophysics is a hot area. One of the interesting results explains why it is that ribosomes can churn out proteins at a constant rate, which one wouldn't normally expect given a random distribution of bound amino acids in the cell. Quantum effects may occur on much larger scales than we suppose.
Apres moi, le deluge!
Using words means rice and raw fish wrapped in seaweed? And after that English lost it's ANSI standard, but C didn't? If your sushi is fluid, I suggest Immodium. Meanwhile, best learn grammar you insensitive clod!
And yet I maintain my citizenship, despite what the government or the rascals in Congress does.
Life is compromise.
I thought we were talking about Apple, not American Politics.
Back in the 70s I helped debug a program called "Wumpus Advisor" in the MIT AI lab that did just that - it inferred what rules of Wumpus you demonstrated you understood, then attempted to give you hints on those you hadn't demonstrated yet (e.g., when you picked to explore a cave that was not the least dangerous on the frontier).
What an inane title.
Linux's implementation of ASLR is substantially inferior to Windows Vista/7
[citation needed]
Yeah, yeah. Limit all the greed except mine. I'll take the greed sins of the world unto myself. Send all your possessions to me. Hurry, while you can still atone!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZqjLa2X3L8
I think you vastly overestimate the number of good/great programmers in the world. Think dozens, not tens of thousands of them, total. It's certainly possible that BASIC can be your first language and you get over it. FORTRAN was my first language and I got over that. But unless you happen to be lucky enough to start with a great language (e.g. LISP) , you will have to unlearn everything else first. Learning bad languages just means it takes longer for you to learn good programming paradigms.
First you say Apple is acting unethically, and now you say they have no moral authority. I think you misapprehend the meaning of those words.
I think you're confusing CUPS and Rendezvous.
OSS is generally written by users for users
While I'm sure most programmers are also users, there are far, far more users who are not programmers. My impression of most OSS tools it that it is written by programmers for programmers, not for users.
This is like arguing Rockefeller didn't have an oil monopoly because you were free to run a wood-burning steam engine, or drill for oil in your own back yard. The monopoly issue relates to control of the market, not to a null of alternatives.
You keep using this term "fair use". I don't think it means what you think it means.
To be mistaken for a photographer or graphics professional? Or maybe just someone with, umm, taste?
Feh!
Don't bother with English 3.11: English 4.0 is already out.
In addition, disbarring lawyers for the real imbicilities could only make the world the better place.
Re: As much as I dislike Apple...?
OK, but you can say the same thing about housing, Obama, and religion. Markets are influenced by emotion. Humans are emotional creatures. Even business value includes intangibles such as "goodwill". If value is subjective as you admit, how do you propose to analyze any "illusory value" above that - it's not illusory to the buyer. You can say that the objective value (within some preference function or system) is less than the price, and you don't have to buy it. But that trades happen at a given price implies some individuals maintain the belief that the value to them at that time meets or exceeds the price. Non-centralized markets means that you can't objectify away environment and intention. You also can't really measure them easily. Put another way: brands have value too.